Yorkshire Ripper no longer a threat...possible release!
Discussion
Holy moses! 
This monster that terrorised and murdered 13 women for so long has human rights?? WTF...animals like this should be locked up and the key thrown away! Life should mean life surely??
Fron ITN news...
Ripper 'fit to leave Broadmoor'
The Yorkshire Ripper could be transferred from Broadmoor after doctors decided he was no longer dangerous, according to reports. Peter Sutcliffe, who murdered 13 women and tried to kill seven others in the 1970s and 80s, is believed to have been signed off as low-risk by medical staff at the top security hospital in Berkshire.
If Justice Secretary Jack Straw agrees with the classification he could be moved to a medium-security facility before eventually being released.
Sutcliffe, from Bradford, Yorkshire, was jailed in 1981 for his murder spree across Yorkshire and in Manchester.
He was given 20 life sentences and was told by the judge that he would serve a minimum of 30 years.
He began his sentence in prison but three years later was diagnosed with schizophrenia and transferred to Broadmoor.
Last year his lawyer Saimo Chahal claimed the Home Office disregarded his human rights because they failed to formally fix a tariff for his sentence.
Ms Chahal, who specialises in civil liberties and social welfare as a partner at London-based Bindmans & Partners, also aimed to get Sutcliffe back into the prison system and has requested a reassessment of his psychiatric condition.
A spokeswoman for the Ministry of Justice said she was unable to comment on individual cases
This monster that terrorised and murdered 13 women for so long has human rights?? WTF...animals like this should be locked up and the key thrown away! Life should mean life surely??
Fron ITN news...
Ripper 'fit to leave Broadmoor'
The Yorkshire Ripper could be transferred from Broadmoor after doctors decided he was no longer dangerous, according to reports. Peter Sutcliffe, who murdered 13 women and tried to kill seven others in the 1970s and 80s, is believed to have been signed off as low-risk by medical staff at the top security hospital in Berkshire.
If Justice Secretary Jack Straw agrees with the classification he could be moved to a medium-security facility before eventually being released.
Sutcliffe, from Bradford, Yorkshire, was jailed in 1981 for his murder spree across Yorkshire and in Manchester.
He was given 20 life sentences and was told by the judge that he would serve a minimum of 30 years.
He began his sentence in prison but three years later was diagnosed with schizophrenia and transferred to Broadmoor.
Last year his lawyer Saimo Chahal claimed the Home Office disregarded his human rights because they failed to formally fix a tariff for his sentence.
Ms Chahal, who specialises in civil liberties and social welfare as a partner at London-based Bindmans & Partners, also aimed to get Sutcliffe back into the prison system and has requested a reassessment of his psychiatric condition.
A spokeswoman for the Ministry of Justice said she was unable to comment on individual cases
Edited by satman on Wednesday 18th February 10:56
moleamol said:
Are life sentences in this country based on something other than humans? How can 20 life sentences be 30 years?
People like this, Huntley (Soham murders) et el, should not be given 20 life sentances with a minimum 30 years...they should told that they will rot in prison without any chance of release, then some Lawyer (who obviously has no feelings for the victims and wants to make a name for himself) cannot say that a murderer has served their time, and has 'human rights' to be considered for release!I thought he was given a whole life tariff like Hindley was? If not the only possible reason why not is that he was in Broadmoor. So if his lawyer succeeeds in getting him back into mainstream prison the Home Sec can then issue a whole life tariff. There is no way he will be "released".
satman said:
moleamol said:
Are life sentences in this country based on something other than humans? How can 20 life sentences be 30 years?
People like this, Huntley (Soham murders) et el, should not be given 20 life sentances with a minimum 30 years...they should told that they will rot in prison without any chance of release, then some Lawyer (who obviously has no feelings for the victims and wants to make a name for himself) cannot say that a murderer has served their time, and has 'human rights' to be considered for release!
ukwill said:
What stews my urine is why people like Ms Chahal think that someone like Peter Sutcliffe deserves a place back in society.
There are people who clearly are not fit for society. Peter Sutcliffe is one.
Like most lawyers, they probably don't but they will hide behidn the 'everyone deserves a fair chance' bThere are people who clearly are not fit for society. Peter Sutcliffe is one.
ks.
jailed in 81, can you imagine how insane that would be stepping out into 2009?
i'd have thought he'd not last 5 mins out in the real world after all that time inside. I'll agree that he should remain there untill death, However i can also see why he's become low risk, mainly due to the fact that after that amount of time he must be heavily instatutionalised.
i'd have thought he'd not last 5 mins out in the real world after all that time inside. I'll agree that he should remain there untill death, However i can also see why he's become low risk, mainly due to the fact that after that amount of time he must be heavily instatutionalised.
Another murderer going for release is Colin Pitchfork -
http://www.thisisleicestershire.co.uk/news/Date-ki...
http://www.thisisleicestershire.co.uk/news/Date-ki...
Mc Lovin said:
jailed in 81, can you imagine how insane that would be stepping out into 2009?
i'd have thought he'd not last 5 mins out in the real world after all that time inside. I'll agree that he should remain there untill death, However i can also see why he's become low risk, mainly due to the fact that after that amount of time he must be heavily instatutionalised.
Andy Dufresne: I just don't understand what happened in there. i'd have thought he'd not last 5 mins out in the real world after all that time inside. I'll agree that he should remain there untill death, However i can also see why he's become low risk, mainly due to the fact that after that amount of time he must be heavily instatutionalised.
Heywood: Old man's crazy as a rat in a tin s
thouse, is what. Red: Oh Heywood, that's enough out of you!
Ernie: I heard he had you s
ttin' in your pants! Heywood: f
k you! Red: Would you knock it off? Brooks ain't no bug. He's just... just institutionalized.
Heywood: Institutionalized, my ass.
Red: The man's been in here fifty years, Heywood. Fifty years! This is all he knows. In here, he's an important man. He's an educated man. Outside, he's nothin'! Just a used up con with arthritis in both hands.
moleamol said:
Are life sentences in this country based on something other than humans? How can 20 life sentences be 30 years?
'Life' does not refer to the time served in prison. The life sentence is never completed; you are only ever out on parole. I do fail to see how Sutcliffe can ever be fit for release though - the man is clearly not wired up right.Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff